Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences (2020) 12:175

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-020-01130-1

REVIEW

Ceramic raw materials: how to recognize them and locate the supply
basins—mineralogy, petrography
Giuseppe Montana 1

Received: 22 January 2020 / Accepted: 24 June 2020

# Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020

Abstract
This tutorial paper is focused on the mineralogical-petrographic characterization of clayey raw materials with the purpose of
sourcing supply basins and answering questions about the provenance of the corresponding archaeological ceramic artefacts. The
first part gives general indications of how to profitably study archaeological ceramic thin sections through the polarizing
microscope. Brief notes are provided on the theoretical basis of optical microscopy. A scheme is then provided for the petro-
graphic description of ceramic samples, concerning the textural and compositional characteristics of aplastic inclusions and
groundmass. Suggestions are also given for identifying any minero-petrographic marker and establishing minero-petrographic
groups (MGP) aimed at archaeological ceramic provenance studies. After broadly describing the geological origin of the clay
deposits, there is discussion of how to plan a field survey aimed at the location of clay sources and sampling. The importance of
the ethnoarchaeometric approach in provenance studies is also underlined. The third part of the paper describes the preliminary
treatments to which the clayey raw materials are subjected before reporting on a grain size analysis and how to proceed when
performing experimental firing tests. Finally some suggestions are made about how to compare clay firing tests (experimental
briquettes) and archaeological ceramic finds when assessing a production centre.

Keywords Clays analysis . Raw materials for ceramic production . Polarizing optical microscopy . Thin section mineralogy and
petrography . Archaeoceramics

Premise technological character and suitability of raw materials

This paper contributes to the Topical Collection (TC)
“Ceramics: Research questions and answers” aimed at guiding
researchers in the study of archaeological ceramics from ex-
cavation to study and preservation in museum collections.
Each contribution has a tutorial approach covering one of
the main issues pertaining to the study of ceramics as follows:
research questions and sampling criteria (Gliozzo 2020a); the
chemical (Hein and Kilikoglou 2020) and mineralogical-
petrographic (this paper) investigation of raw materials; the
This article is part of the Topical Collection on Ceramics raw materials
Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article
(https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-020-01130-1) contains supplementary
material, which is available to authorized users.
* Giuseppe Montana
giuseppe.montana@unipa.it
1
Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra e del Mare (DiSTeM), Università
di Palermo, Via Archirafi, 22, 90123 Palermo, Italy
(Gualtieri 2020); the processing (Eramo 2020) and modelling
(Thér 2020) of clays; surface finishing (Ionescu and Hoeck
2020) and ceramic firing (Gliozzo 2020b); the investigation of
different coatings such as black glass-ceramic (Aloupi-Siotis
2020), terra sigillata (Sciau et al. 2020) and glazes (Pradell
and Molera 2020); the isotopic study of particular types of
products such as Chinese ceramics (Henderson et al. 2020);
the identification of post-burial transformations (Maritan
2020); the dating of ceramics (Galli et al. 2020); and the res-
toration and musealization of ceramics (de Lapérouse 2020).
This Topical Collection concludes with a tutorial on statistical
data processing (Papageorgiou 2020).
The importance of thin section microscopy
for the study of clays and ceramics
Ceramic manufacturing needs multifaceted empirical knowl-
edge. The development of acceptable productive standards is
interrelated with the choices made by the potter in selecting
 175 Page 2 of 19
sources for raw materials, firewood, tools and infrastructure.
Technological choices are in turn subjected to cultural influ-
ences and practicality (Sillar and Tite 2000). Any ceramic
object, even without considering all the aspects connected
with artistic and handicraft abilities, thus represents the results
of a well-structured “production chain” which starts from the
localization and exploitation of suitable raw materials. All the
subsequent operations of shaping, drying and firing will lead
to a good finished product with specific morphological/
functional characteristics and mechanical properties.
The assessment of textural and/or mineralogical similarities
or differences between specific clays and manufactures may
allow compositional groups and productive contexts to be
established, and allow archaeologists to make historical and
socioeconomic inferences (e.g. Peacock 1971; Arnold 1972;
Freestone et al. 1982; Williams 1983; Fulford and Peacock
1984; Schubert 1986; Day 1989; Middleton and Freestone
1991; Whitbread 1995).
The study of clays and ceramics necessarily involves both
chemical analyses (Hein and Kilikoglou 2020, in this TC) and
minero-petrographic analyses. Minero-petrographic investi-
gations are mainly carried out using powder X-ray powder
diffraction (XRPD) and optical microscopy with transmitted
polarized light. The XRPD technique, widely used for decades
in the field of earth sciences, allows the qualitative, semi-
quantitative and quantitative mineralogical characterization
of both ceramic artefacts and clayey raw materials. The data
obtained by XRD, however, turns out to be more useful for the
technological characterization of ceramic products, and in par-
ticular to define their “equivalent firing temperature” (Gliozzo
2020b, in this TC), than in the definition of significant markers
for “provenance determination” (i.e. to distinguish between
local production and imports).
Thin section microscopy can make significant contri-
butions to study of the life cycle of a ceramic artefact
(production chain, distribution, use), as well as to study
of the technical skills and social levels of the involved
cultures (Tite 2008). The first application of thin section
microscopy to the characterization of archaeological ce-
ramics dates back to the second half of the nineteenth
century, and was by the English scholar H.C. Sorby,
who contributed important developments to this technique
in the UK and studied, among other materials, Roman and
medieval bricks (Worley 2009). The roots of the long
journey that led archaeologists to today’s conscious and
systematic use of ceramic petrology, however, can be
found around the mid-twentieth century (Felts 1942;
Shepard 1936 and 1956). The valuable contribution of
Anna Shepard is nowadays recognized as a milestone in
the history of archaeometry. In fact, she described for the
first time the need to combine stylistic-morphological as-
sessment with petrographic analysis (Shepard 1965).
From that point on, it was increasingly highlighted that
Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175
petrographic data should be always included in the
archaeometric study of ceramics, as they always have
been for raw materials.
Geologists use petrography to identify minerals and
recognize/classify any lithotype. A petrographic thin section
is a laboratory preparation (0.03-mm-thick slice attached to a
26-mm × 46-mm glass slide with epoxy resin) obtained from
coherent or incoherent samples of rocks (sands, clays), soils
and several types of archaeological finds (pottery, mortars,
stuccoes, concrete, etc.). A thin section of a ceramic sample
is prepared from a 3–4 cm fragment (with a weight that should
roughly range from 2 to 4 g) that is cut along its thickness
(cross-section).The preparation sequence is schematically rep-
resented in Supplementary Fig. 1. The thin section can be
properly observed through a polarized transmitted light micro-
scope. As polarized light passes through a 30-μm thick min-
eral, it produces optical phenomena such as chromatic polar-
ization, extinction, twinning, zoning and pleochroism, and
highlights several diagnostic features (i.e. crystal habit, cleav-
age, relief, inclusions, alterations) that allow the precise iden-
tification of the minerals. Thin section observation also pro-
vides a fundamental description of rock texture (or micro-
structure). Texture refers to the geometric relationship be-
tween grains and matrix (in sedimentary rocks) or groundmass
(in crystalline rocks). It includes physical features such as
grain size, shape, distribution and roundness, at both the mac-
roscopic (hand-sample) and microscopic scale. Since ceramics
can be considered “metamorphosed materials” that derive
from a natural sedimentary rock (clayey deposits), the terms
“groundmass” and “matrix” are both applicable for describing
the finest component of the ceramic paste.
Technological information can also be inferred by thin sec-
tion microscopy. During the firing step, in fact, there are sev-
eral transformations due to the increase in temperature (gen-
erally up to 800–900 °C).The ceramic paste changes its min-
eralogical composition considerably and becomes a rigid ma-
terial, comparable with a rock. The necessary skills are in a
geologist’s educational background and can be acquired by
attending university level courses (for the basics) and by ev-
eryday practice (e.g. Williams et al. 1982; Pichler and
Schmitt-Riegraf 1997; Raymond 2010).
The description of a thin section using the polarizing
microscope
Qualitative polarizing microscopy is a complex technique,
although it is popular and supported by several reference
books (e.g. Kerr 1977; McCrone et al. 1978; Robinson and
Bradbury 1992; Delly 2017).
A polarizing binocular microscope is normally equipped
with four objectives that allow observation at × 40, × 100, ×
200 and × 400 magnification. The unique characteristic of the
polarizing microscope is the presence of two polarizing
Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175 Page 3 of 19 175

Fig. 1 Ceramic microfabrics with

different compositional and/or
textural features straightforwardly
discernible by thin section mi-
croscopy (crossed nicol; scale
bar = 0.5 mm): (a) prevalence of
volcanic inclusions (pyroxenes,
feldspars) and lithic fragments;
(b) metamorphic lithic fragments
together with quartz (monocrys-
talline and polycrystalline), feld-
spars and mica; (c) abundant cal-
careous microfossils (planktonic
foraminifera) partially trans-
formed after the firing process;
(d) very few aplastic inclusions
and lumpy groundmass; (e)
microfabric showing serial size
distribution of the aplastic inclu-
sions; (f) microfabric showing bi-
modal size distribution of the
aplastic inclusions (hiatal)

elements, traditionally named “nicols”1 as follows: (a) the
polariser, which is located below the thin section, and (b) the
analyser, located above it (Supplementary Fig. 2). While iso-
tropic minerals or non-crystalline materials will not be visible
using orthoscopic observation with crossed nicols, anisotropic
minerals will show the polarization colours (Perkins and
Henke 2003; MacKenzie et al. 2017).
The procedure and the terminology to describe a clay is
similar to that used for ceramic finds. In the recent past, some
authors attempted to establish rigorous ways of addressing
ceramic description. Their main aims were to help young re-
searchers and to standardize both the lexicon and the proce-
dure (Whitbread 1989; Whitbread 1991; Reedy 2008; Quinn
2013). In practice, each petrographer develops a personal
“working style” on the basis of their skill; however, it is al-
ways better to rely as much as possible on a descriptive
scheme that is supported by a wide consensus in the scientific
1
In honour of William Nicol, who in 1828 first designed these optical devices
from calcite crystals in 1828
community. This last approach, in fact, favours the spread of
clear and standardized results, regarding both the composi-
tional and the textural data.
An effective description of a sample prepared on thin sec-
tion should necessarily include a list of observations such as
those schematically proposed in Supplementary Fig. 3. The
observations can start at low magnification (i.e. × 40 magnifi-
cation) with crossed polarisers. In this way, a panoramic view
of the sample is obtained and a first indication of the mineral-
ogical phases is achieved. After that, the analysis proceeds
with the careful examination of the aplastic inclusions (i.e.
monomineralic granules and polymineralic lithic fragments)
and a description of their size, distribution, relative abundance
or “packing” (expressed as area%), morphology and maxi-
mum grain size (MGS). The grain size is routinely evaluated
with reference to the Udden-Wentworth scale, which is used
as standard for the comprehensive grain size description of
sediments and sedimentary rocks (Blair and McPherson
1999). With the aid of a calibrated optical micrometre, aplastic
inclusions can therefore be distributed into seven classes as
 175 Page 4 of 19
follows: coarse silt (0.03–0.06 mm), very fine sand (0.06–
0.125 mm), fine sand (0.125–0.25 mm), medium sand
(0.25–0.5 mm), coarse sand (0.5–1 mm), very coarse sand
(1–2 mm) and granules (2–4 mm). The relative frequency of
any individual size class can be estimated using suitable qual-
ifying terms (Middleton et al. 1985).The distribution of
aplastic inclusions in the fine groundmass is an important
textural parameter in the study of ceramics, which allows the
distribution to be classified as “serial” (all the grain size clas-
ses being more or less represented),“bimodal” or “hiatal”
(when a significant hiatus between fine and coarser inclusions
is evident).
T h e id e n t i fi c a t i o n a n d q u a n t i f ic a t i o n o f b o t h
monomineralic grains and lithic fragments might require the
use of higher magnification objectives (e.g. × 100). As noted
above, the appropriate interchange of parallel and crossed
nicols highlights many diagnostic parameters (i.e. interference
colours, type and angle of extinction, twinning, crystal habit,
cleavage, pleochroism, etc.), which allows the correct identi-
fication to be made. The relative abundance (modal mineral-
ogy expressed as area %) of aplastic inclusions can be deter-
mined using point-counting procedures or comparative tables
(Van der Plas and Tobi 1965; Matthew 1991). The typical
shortcoming of these methods involves the groundmass, and
in fact, this is made of cryptocrystalline particles that cannot
be unequivocally identified through their optical properties. In
these cases, several qualifying terms can be efficiently used as
follows: for example, the texture can be described as homo-
geneous, heterogeneous or lumpy; the optical activity can be
evaluated as evident, modest or absent; the shape of the pores
can be referred to as irregular, cast, subrounded or amygda-
loidal; the orientation of the pores can be classified as evident,
modest or absent; and several classes can be established for
their size (e.g. 0.01 mm, 0.01–0.1 mm, 0.1–1 mm, >
1 mm).The assessment of microfauna abundance is a further
important feature. Calcareous nannofossils, microfossils or
macrofossils (less frequently) are common in natural clayey
deposits of marine or lacustrine origin. In ceramics, however,
the firing process modifies their internal structure until they
decompose at temperatures close to 900 °C (Maritan et al.
2007; Gliozzo 2020b, in this TC). High firing means they
are no longer identifiable, but their former presence can be
indirectly inferred through a “micritic clot” (i.e. microcrystal-
line calcite formed by the rapid recarbonation of CaO after
firing) and/or subcircular/irregular shaped pore cast (e.g. Cau
Ontiveros et al. 2002; Maritan 2020, this TC). Figure 1 shows
examples of microfabrics clearly distinguishable on the basis
of the peculiar composition of aplastic inclusions or textural
features.
In summary, observations carried out by optical microsco-
py on a clay or ceramic find are of fundamental importance for
their characterization; however, it is necessary to know what
happens to a clay when it is fired in order to understand
Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175
whether a specific raw material was used (or not) for a specific
ceramic production. Otherwise, it is possible to run into inter-
pretative error; for example, to discard a possible raw material
due to the absence of a neoformation phase.
The “provenance” issue: how to distinguish local
production from imports using mineralogical and
petrographic markers
Many analytical techniques have been used for investigating
the geographical distribution and provenance of ceramic arte-
facts with the aim of establishing whether pottery was locally
produced or imported (e.g. Hughes 1981; Bishop et al. 1982;
Rice 1987; Rice 1996).
“Provenance studies” of archaeological ceramics are based
on the theoretical assumption that pottery from a given pro-
duction centre should be characterized by discriminant com-
positional and/or textural markers compared with pottery
made elsewhere. The creation of mineralogical/petrographic
groups established on the basis of the observations made
through the polarizing microscope can thus provide a funda-
mental key to the solution of provenance issues.
Specific mineralogical phases and/or lithic fragments can
be considered “mineralogical-petrographic markers” when
they are not ubiquitous—such as quartz for instance—and a
correspondence between the ceramic paste and the deposit of
clayey raw materials can be measured. Mineralogical-
petrographic markers should be distinctive and unique. This
is the case, for example, for the association of markers found
in late Roman cooking ware produced on the volcanic island
of Pantelleria (Sicily Channel), known as “Pantellerian Ware”
(Fulford and Peacock 1984;Montana et al. 2007). In these
ceramics, the aplastic inclusions are represented by
anorthoclase, aenigmatite, primary quartz and trachytic-
rhyolitic lithic fragments, and this association can not only
be unequivocally related to the Na-peralkaline magmatism
of the island but also excludes most of the hypotheses on
alternative supplies in the entire Mediterranean basin (Fig. 2a).
Broadly speaking, geological areas characterized by the
presence of effusive magmatic products are “advantaged”
from the standpoint of the provenance study, for two main
reasons as follows:(1) they are generally well-studied by
means of mineralogical, petrographic and geochemical
methods, and a comprehensive database is available for com-
parison; and (2) volcanic mineral scan be can be accurately
classified by optical microscopy and matched to specific
geodynamic contexts.
Archaeometric results, however, are not always as direct
and unequivocal as in the case of the aforementioned
“Pantellerian Ware”. Sometimes case studies can be far more
complex, even in the presence of volcanic aplastic inclusions.
For example, several ceramic productions from the Aegean
(Hein and Kilikoglou 2017) and the Tyrrhenian coast of
Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175 Page 5 of 19 175

Fig. 2 Examples of minero-

petrographic markers (crossed
nicol; scale bar = 0.5 mm): (a)
subhedral aenigmatite, plagio-
clase and primary quartz in Late
Roman “Pantellerian Ware”; (b)
prevalent clinopyroxene and K-
feldspar (sanidine) in a Greek-
italic amphora manufactured on
the island of Ischia; (c) large
granitoid lithoclast with a micro-
cline crystal showing “tartan
twinning”, in a Late Roman
cooking pot (south-western
Sardinia production); (d) second-
ary calcite (formed after burial)
that impregnates the originally
low-CaO groundmass of a Late
Roman cooking pot (south-west-
ern Sardinia production)

Campania and Lazio (Thierrin-Michael and Galetti 1996) con-
tain similar pyroclastic volcanic products whose origin can be
many kilometres away. Wind transport can disperse the prod-
ucts of volcanic activity for many kilometres and the proxim-
ity of different volcanic sources with a similar petrogenesis
can further complicate matters (Fig. 2b).
The identification of mineralogical-petrographic markers is
frequently complex, and also from the geo-lithological point
of view. Despite this, sedimentary clays (potential ceramic
raw materials) unconformably2 overlying ancient crystalline
rocks (intrusive magmatic or metamorphic) are relatively
more traceable than other types of deposits. In this case, the
correct classification of lithic fragments might offer useful
insights, although they frequently involve small dimensions
(typically less than 1 mm; see, e.g. Fig. 2c).
As mentioned above, some of the main rock-forming min-
erals cannot be considered “markers”. Quartz and K-feldspar,
for example, are common siliciclastic detrital constituents in
clay deposits and therefore they are not useful “markers” ex-
cept in very rare cases. For example, the observation of a fine-
grained intergrowth of quartz and alkali feldspars (defined
“graphic intergrowth”) or perthitic exsolutions in alkali feld-
spars may be related to acid intrusive protoliths. Similarly, the
2 rographic subgroups. Given a similar mineralogical composi-
Unconformities are gaps in the geologic record that indicate episodes of
crustal deformation, erosion, and sea level variation. They consist of non-
depositional surfaces separating two different lithostratigraphic units.
scarcity of quartz-feldspathic-micaceous lithic inclusions as-
sociated with the presence of small micas (in the form of
submillimetric granules or as tiny flakes dispersed in the
groundmass) can be indicative of fine sediments deriving from
the weathering of medium-high grade metamorphites. Other
important mineralogical-petrographic markers may be repre-
sented by (a) volcanic glass (pumice or scoria), which can also
be altered (sideromelane); (b) chert (microcrystalline and
cryptocrystalline quartz); (c) Fe-Mg bearing silicates (i.e. py-
roxene, amphibole, biotite, garnet, etc.); and (d) any other
mineralogical phase that can be directly associated with spe-
cific geographical areas and lithological contexts.
The carbonates rarely serve as markers, although their
prevalence with respect to the detritic siliciclastic component
surely addresses the use of marly sediments. Petrographic
grouping can be improved through the study of microfossils
and nannofossils, the latter being more resistant to the firing
process and more effective chronological indicators than mi-
crofossils (Quinn and Day 2007).
Leaving aside the mineralogical and petrographic markers,
now, the main textural characteristics involving both aplastic
inclusions (i.e., relative abundance, roundness degree) and
groundmass (i.e. optical activity, microstructure, pore size
and/or orientation) may also be used for the definition of pet-
tion (both in qualitative and quantitative terms), the textural
variability of a ceramic paste could be related—among many
 175 Page 6 of 19
possible factors—to a change in supply site or a change in the
characteristics of a single clay deposit.
Lastly, post-burial transformations and, in particular, the
precipitation of calcite by vadose water, should be also con-
sidered and evaluated carefully. Secondary calcite appears as
aggregates of micrometric crystals (micrite) or as euhedral-
subhedral crystals filling partially or completely the larger
pores (Fig. 2d). This micrite may extensively impregnate the
fine matrix (groundmass) or grow as an incrustation in the
external surface of the ceramic sample (e.g. Cau Ontiveros
et al. 2002). For these reasons, it is of striking importance to
assess the presence of secondary calcite through optical mi-
croscopy because its presence can lead to an overestimation of
CaO by bulk chemistry, which affects the SiO2/CaO ratio (an
important chemical marker).
How to establish a minero-petrographic group by
means of thin section optical microscopy
A minero-petrographic group (MPG) is composed of a set of
ceramic samples characterized by a consistent homogeneity in
texture and composition. The typological and/or chronologi-
cal analogies between the samples belonging to a paste group,
and their assignment to a specific archaeological context, re-
inforce the representativeness of the group itself, which can
then become a reference for attesting a given ceramic produc-
tion centre.
The transition from the MPG to the “reference group” oc-
curs when it finds a correspondence with other factors such as
Fig. 3 Example of “non-automatic grouping” of ceramic pastes after thin section microscopy
Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175
the chemical composition, the archaeological typology and
the production chronology.
Grouping procedures can be “manual” or “statistically
assisted”. Manual grouping is based on the observations
performed through optical microscopy and proceeds by
degrees of similarity. In practice, significant features are
first highlighted, and then all samples which include them
are grouped together. This is a common method for
grouping and the quality of the results relies heavily on
the experience of the observer and on the care they take in
giving an accurate description and an unbiased
interpretation.
Recalling a remark made above, possible mistakes arising
from subjective evaluations and inexperience can be mini-
mized by using standardized descriptions. In this case, data
can be represented by synoptic tables (Fig. 3) that explain and
highlight distinctive (textural and/or compositional) differ-
ences between the established paste groups.
This method is effective in most cases, however, a large set
of samples(e.g. consisting of several dozens or even hundreds
of samples) can make it difficult to handle large datasets.
Problems can arise when making comparisons in order to
verify the coherence of the petrographic groups and, at the
same time, when trying to process the results into a clear
graphic presentation. In these last cases, the “statistically
assisted procedure” introduces several types of statistical
methods for data processing and display. In this regard, how-
ever, it should be emphasized that the procedure is not
completely free and several variables, coding and scales need
to be accurately selected.
Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175
Fig. 4 Example of multiple component analysis (MCA) on transformed
textural and compositional data. The different symbols identify the paste
groups, defined on the basis of thin section microscopy
Cau Ontiveros et al. (2004) proposed a useful method with
which to extract reliable groupings. Nominal variables such as
aplastic sorting, aplastic distribution, the presence of specific
minerals and lithic fragments, the optical activity of the
groundmass and pore shape, and ordinal variables such as
grain size class frequency, packing %, the relative abundance
of specific minerals and lithic fragments, pore size frequency
and pore orientation can be coded and converted to binary
values. These new variables can be used to generate a data
matrix, which in turn can be evaluated using multivariate sta-
tistical analysis (see also Papageorgiou 2020, this TC).
Suitable methods include multiple correspondence analysis
(MCA), which, using both nominal and ordinal variables
(Fig. 4), allows a set of qualitative or categorical dependent
variables to be analysed (as with principal component analysis
which uses only numerical variables). MCA is thus a descrip-
tive and exploratory technique designed to analyse large
datasets that include different types of information (e.g.
Fig. 5 Overfired shard found in the excavation of a fifth century BC ceramic kiln at Selinunte, western Sicily (a); thin section micrograph of the same
sample (parallel nicol; scale bar = 0.5 mm) (b)
Page 7 of 19 175
Baxter et al. 2008; Baxter 2009; Montana et al. 2009 and
2012; Angourakis et al. 2018; Bechtold et al. 2018).
How to locate a ceramic raw material supply
basin
The creation of the petrographic paste groups prepares the
ground to test several (archaeologically reliable) hypotheses
regarding the localization of raw materials supply basins.
Indeed, the discovery of a ceramic workshop or other produc-
tion indicators (i.e. clay mixing tanks and kilns) makes it
straightforward to assign a MPG to a specific place of manu-
facture. In several cases, the presence of overfired sherds can
be sufficient to reconstruct the presence of a production centre
(Fig. 5).
Unfortunately, neither kilns nor overfired sherds are com-
monly found in archaeological excavations, and therefore,
provenance investigation relies on the comparison between
the composition of the MPG and the compositional and tex-
tural characteristics of locally available clayey raw materials.
First of all, geological maps of the area should be acquired and
the geological setting of the territory should be fully examined
(stratigraphic successions, tectonic and geomorphological
evolution). Secondly, fieldwork should be carried out in order
to verify the extension and accessibility of the potential clayey
outcrops. At the same time, information should be acquired on
any past ceramic production in the local area, as well as on any
artisan and/or industrial productions still active in the same
area.
In this phase, any detail of the ancient production can be
useful. It is common, for instance, that artisanal traditions are
handed down for centuries/millennia and the recovery of this
information can inform the researcher about the selection
criteria of the clayey raw materials, the location of ancient
quarries and the adoption of preliminary treatments such as
purification or tempering. This approach is certainly time-
 175 Page 8 of 19
consuming but develops our understanding of the investigated
territory and provides a solid basis for comprehensive and
representative sampling.
In the laboratory, the clays are then characterized from a
mineralogical and petrographic point of view. The sample can
be investigated either in its “natural” state or
granulometrically separated; however, a relevant comparison
with the ceramic finds is obtained when the clayey sample is
subjected to a thermal treatment. The experimental firing
should be carried out at temperatures roughly close to those
inferred by the study of the ceramics and, after cooling, the
firing test should be cut to prepare the thin section. Lastly, the
thin section is observed through the polarizing microscope in
order to evaluate the thermal transformations of each compo-
nent (phases, lithic fragments, matrix, etc.).
The theoretical advantages and limitations of this method
of provenance determination were discussed 25 years ago by
Ian Freestone (1995) who pointed out the presence of unam-
biguous and clear minero-petrographic markers in raw mate-
rials quarried at a relatively short distance from outcrops of
crystalline rocks (igneous or metamorphic). As already
stressed above, however there are still major unresolved prob-
lems in the provenance investigation of fine-sized ceramics
(i.e. with few visible inclusions or with prevalent aplastic in-
clusion comprising anything between coarse silt and very fine
sand of 0.125 mm). Even in the more problematic cases, how-
ever, a few markers can be found when microscopic analyses
consider the details of nannofossils speciation, accessory min-
erals separation (combining optical microscopy with scanning
electron microscopy), heavy-liquid separation and the Frantz
isodynamic magnetic separator.
Clay deposits: nature and composition
Raw materials of geological origin (geomaterials) are mainly
represented by sandy and/or silty clays exploited from natural
outcrops, alluvial deposits and soils (e.g. Montana 2017 and
reference therein). According to the AIPEA (Association
Internationale pour l’etude des Argiles), the term “clay” can
refer to a natural incoherent (or weakly coherent) fine-grained
material deriving either from the in situ weathering of the
majority of lithotypes or deposited after a sedimentary cycle.
The term “clay” can be also used to classify small particles
(grain length less than 0.004 mm) in unconsolidated sedimen-
tary rocks or loose soils.
Clay deposits are primarily composed of “clay minerals”.
Clay minerals are hydrous aluminium phyllosilicates, with a
layered crystalline structure, and are usually formed as prod-
ucts of chemical weathering of other silicate minerals at the
Earth’s surface (Velde 1995). Primary clay minerals form after
the extensive alteration of pre-existing minerals due to contact
with water or steam, as in the case of thermal springs and
volcanic deposits. Kaolinite is mostly found in weathering
Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175
zones on granitoid bedrocks. Montmorillonites are more com-
mon in the lower parts of the weathering profiles, and mixed-
layer illite-smectites are abundant in clay assemblages that
develop from mica-bearing precursor rocks. Clay minerals
have a secondary detritic origin in lacustrine and marine sed-
iments, and in continental alluvial deposits. They are also
common residual constituents of weathered rocks and soil
horizons.
The most important physical characteristics of clay min-
erals derive from their layered crystalline structure, size
(micrometric/submicrometric) and chemical composition.
Some clay minerals may swell easily, up to double in thick-
ness, through the absorption of externally supplied water.
Crystal surfaces strongly attract water molecules and may
soak up and/or release ions from a solution, and this phenom-
enon explains why a mixture of clay and water may result in a
more or less plastic body (depending on the mineralogical
composition). The plasticity of a clay, in fact, is related to
the morphology of the plate-like clay mineral particles that
slide over the others when water is added, and act as a lubri-
cant. This property is affected by the basal spacing of the 2:1
clay minerals; the larger the basal spacing, the higher the water
adsorption capacity (Schmitz et al. 2004, Olivera Modesto and
Bernardin 2008; Andrade et al. 2011).
Plastic clay deposits used for ancient ceramic productions
are characterized by various proportions of kaolinite, illite,
montmorillonite and I/S mixed-layers, and the technical per-
formance of a specific ceramic raw material is a function of
clay mineral composition, distribution, relative abundance,
grain size and the ratio with respect to the detrital sandy frac-
tion (see Gualtieri 2020 in this TC).
While the properties of clay minerals can be advantageous-
ly exploited for ceramic production, however, they turn out to
be disadvantageous for provenance investigations. The struc-
tural collapse of clay minerals occurs at about 600 °C, and
therefore, they are rarely found in ceramics. In other words,
the information inferred by their presence/absence can be used
for the reconstruction of the technological cycle; conversely, a
direct comparison between a clayey deposit and a ceramic
product is not straightforward.
How to design a survey for sampling ceramic raw
materials
The main factors governing rock weathering include the type
of bedrock, the abundance of water, the temperature, the ac-
tion of living organisms and the time. The transport and de-
position of sediments produced by the erosion of older rocks
and soils are the central part of the sedimentary rock formation
cycle. For this reason, the careful characterization of the
coarse detrital fraction (inclusions ranging between 0.06 and
2 mm in diameter) allows representative mineralogical and
petrographic markers to be highlighted. This point recalls
Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175 Page 9 of 19 175

Fig. 6 Thick outcrop of upper

Miocene clays affected by rill
erosion in the Madonie Mounts,
central Sicily (a); clay sample
collected after the removal of a
thin surface layer in the vicinity of
the Phoenician site of Tharros,
western Sardinia (b); stratigraphic
sampling in a steep clayey slope
located in the Valle deiTempli,
Agrigento, western Sicily (c);
front of a clay quarry with
intercalations of sandy clays near
Gela, central-southern Sicily (d);
excavation in a suburban area not
far from Oristano (Sardinia)
which highlights the stratigraphic
succession of the clay deposit (e);
small upper Pliocene clay outcrop
along a beach located at around
1500 m from the archaeological
site of Selinunte, western Sicily
(f)

what has already been anticipated in relation to the importance
of knowing an area in detail; in fact, it is worth reiterating the
concept that clay sources can be discriminated only insofar as
their association of minerals and/or lithic fragments and/or
microfossils is well known, and, obviously, unique (e.g.
Maggetti 1982; Adan-Bayewitz and Perlman 1985; Harrad
2004; Gliozzo et al. 2014; Gliozzo et al. 2018).
As a direct consequence of the thought expressed above,
the design of the survey for sampling ceramic raw materials
starts from a comprehensive knowledge of the geo-
lithological features of the area of interest and proceeds with
a preliminary field survey. This last is of outmost importance
because geological cartography does not show the present-day
use of terrain, which is often intensively cultivated or subject
to intense geomorphological processes (mainly landslides).
Sampling sites are then selected on the basis of several
considerations as follows: (a) extension of the outcrops; (b)
stratigraphic-structural relationships with the adjacent geolog-
ical formations; (c) geomorphological setting; (d) presence of
quarries (active or not); (e) extension of cultivated area; and (f)
other logistical difficulties such as access to private property.
The number of representative samples to be taken is a function
of the compositional and textural homogeneity of the clay depos-
it, which, in turn, is mainly associated with the frequency of the
sandy interstratifications and the content of calcareous microfau-
na, as well as the relative variability of one or both these
 175 Page 10 of 19 Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175

Fig. 7 Old photographic

evidence of the work of a family
of potters active for over two
centuries at Polizzi Generosa
(Palermo, Sicily): production of
terracotta pots for drinking use in
the 1950s (by courtesy of G.
D’Angelo) (a); laying of bricks
for air-drying dating back to the
1930s, with an operating furnace
in the background (by courtesy of
G. D’Angelo) (b); primary phases
of the traditional production of
tiles (c–d) and bricks (e–f)
photographed a few years ago at
the Martinelli’s furnace,
Racalmuto (Agrigento, Sicily)

parameters along the stratigraphic succession. In any case, the
number of samples collected for each deposit should be ade-
quately representative of the intra-informational variance (both
textural and compositional). For example, the clay field survey
carried out for a radius of a few kilometres around a potential
production centre in western Sicily involved verification that the
collection of 5–10 samples for each single clay formation was
representative (considering 2–3 different outcrops and/or bottom-
top samples along the stratigraphic succession in a single out-
crop) (Montana et al. 2011).
Lastly, particular attention should be paid to the areas
where contact between two formations is sharp, especially in
the case of weakly coherent lithotypes, and to possible an-
thropic or natural contamination. It should also be never for-
gotten that the choice/selection of a ceramic raw material does
not only depend on its nearby availability.
The practice of clay sampling
Necessary equipment includes GPS, digital camera, geologi-
cal map of the area (1:50000 scale or larger), hammer, small
hoe and shovel, polyethylene bags, permanent markers and
tags. The quantity of material to be taken should correspond
to at least 1–3 kg, depending on the clay moisture content.
Easier sampling is generally carried out along morpholog-
ical discontinuities that intercept the clay layers along their
thickness, which are mostly represented by valley and other
natural depressions or by stream incisions. In general, it is
always better to target outcrops along slopes that are not ex-
cessively steep and affected by a modest washout due to rill
erosion. This choice should prevent the development of dense
vegetation, which on the contrary should be rather sparse
(Fig. 6a). During sampling, the most superficial part of the
clayey deposit (40 cm are often enough), which likely en-
closes more organic remains, should be removed and only
the less oxidized part of the clay layer should be taken. A
suitable layer can usually be distinguished by its grey colour
and it may be necessary to dig for 50–100 cm before finding it
(Fig. 6b).
In any case, if the clay outcrop is of considerable thickness
(synorogenic and postorogenic Neogene deposit reach up to
hundreds of meters in the Italian Apennine chain), it is
Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175
Fig. 8 Separation of the sandy fraction from an aqueous suspension of a
ceramic raw clay: the sand grains, after a short time, calculable according
to the Stock law, separate from the silty clay fraction (which remains in
suspension) and settle at the bottom of the graduated container (a); the
aqueous suspension of fine particles is then subjected to centrifugation
cycles through which the silt is separated from the clay (b)
necessary to take a greater number of samples, distributed
from the bottom to the top of the outcrop. This method allows
any compositional and/or textural variation to be considered
(Fig. 6c).
Active quarries are favourable sampling sites because their
outcrops are freshly exposed (Fig. 6d).Conversely, urbanized
contexts can be problematic unless building foundations or
other massive infrastructures are under construction
(Fig. 6e). Actually, urbanized areas should never be
Page 11 of 19 175
disregarded because they were often exploited for quarrying
raw materials (stone or clay). Such opportunity could thus turn
out to be advantageous for the contextualization of locally
made ceramic artefacts.
The silty-sandy clay lenses typical of alluvial deposits
(Holocene) should also be taken into due consideration, since
they were often used as a ceramic raw material, as should river
palaeochannels and terraces. The “ceramic clays” deposited in
shallow marine environments, which characterize the Plio-
Pleistocene coastal deposits in the Mediterranean area, should
be considered equally important (Fig. 6f). In this last case,
seawater contamination may occur due to capillary rise, and
therefore, the sample should be subjected to specific pre-
treatment (e.g. dispersion in deionized water by means of ul-
trasonic bath) before the granulometric, mineralogical and
chemical analyses take place.
The amount of sample is also important. A quantity approx-
imately equal to 1 kg is generally sufficient even if it is always
necessary to adapt this weight to the type of analyses and the
number of replicas planned. For example, the usual
mineralogical-petrographic and chemical analyses are often
combined with the study of micropalaeontological washed
samples by optical microscopy and SEM. These are indispens-
able for the relative dating of the deposits and for the individu-
ation of possible correlations with the ceramic finds. The study
of the palaeontological content allows “biostratigraphic dating”,
and this dating helps distinguishing specific clay deposits. The
associations of microfossils, such as foraminifers, are also valid
indicators of the reconstruction of the palaeoenvironment of
sediment deposition. In summary, considering the amount of
clay needed for the micropalaeontological investigations (50–
100 g), the amount required for the grain size analysis (500–
1000 g), the amount needed for experimental firing, thin section
and chemical analyses (300–500 g) and the inevitable waste
between one process to another, an amount of at least 1500 g
is required for accurate study.
Ethnoarchaeometric field survey: sampling of
traditional ceramic products
Ethnoarchaeological approaches are now well established in
archaeological research and, in particular, ceramic ethno-
archaeology makes significant contributions to the knowledge
of the cycle of ceramic production, from the selection of raw
materials to the finished artefacts (e.g. Kramer 1985; Longacre
1991; Arnold et al. 1991; Costin 2000; Arnold 2000; Bowser
2000; Kolb 2001; Stark 2003).
As previously pointed out, within a specific territorial
framework, the mineralogical-petrographic comparison be-
tween the available clayey raw materials and the local ce-
ramics can provide the criteria for sourcing suitable clays;
however, it is well known that possible pre-treatments may
significantly change the compositional and textural
 175 Page 12 of 19 Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175

Fig. 9 Laboratory manufacturing

of small clay briquettes for firing
tests: (a) preparation of a clayey
paste (plastic state) and
assemblage of the wooden
framework as intended; (b) filling
the sample holder boxes with
plastic clay using a steel spatula
and by applying moderate hand
pressure with the help of small
wooden plungers; (c) briquettes
removed from the wooden
framework after complete drying
in a thermo-ventilated oven at
60 °C for 48 h; (d) briquette im-
mediately after controlled firing at
800 °C in muffle furnace

characteristics of the natural clay, so that the comparison men-
tioned above becomes difficult.
An “ethnographic survey” could be undertaken to solve this
type of issue. In several regions, in fact, the same clayey deposits
used in antiquity are still used today, according to long-
established traditional practices. An analysis of modern artisanal
products can therefore provide an insight into the locally avail-
able raw materials that could have also been used in antiquity.
According to Buxeda I Garrigos et al. (2003), the application of
analytical techniques to the study of the raw materials and fin-
ished products in ethnoarchaeological cases is defined as
“ethnoarchaeometry” (Cau Ontiveros et al. 2015; Cantin and
Mayor 2018).
Ethnoarchaeometry can be used to explore the presence of
clayey raw material suitable for ceramic production, the type of
ceramics produced with such materials and to access rather de-
tailed information on the “operating chain”. It is still possible to
acquire, through collaboration with the local inhabitants, detailed
testimonies about inactive productions perhaps accompanied by
old journalistic articles, written notes or even old family photos
(Fig. 7a–b). It is not unheard of, in fact, that past ceramic pro-
duction often involved the whole community; and it is therefore
precisely the memory of willing people that guides the research
in the localization of clay quarries, especially when modern ac-
tivities (i.e. intensive cultivations, construction of public infra-
structures or residential complexes, etc.) have dramatically
changed the landscape. A dataset acquired by this method is
complementary to the analyses carried out on local clay raw
materials and archaeological artefacts.
For example, in the Mediterranean coastal area sand insular
contexts—from the Balearics to Sardinia and Sicily up to the
Aegean islands—several artisanal productions of bricks, tiles
and pots have proved to be technologically similar to the an-
cient ceramics and to use the local clayey raw materials
(Fig. 7c–f). In particular, some case studies carried out in
Sicily suggested that the technical choices adopted by the
present potter in terms of clay treatment and firing perfor-
mance correspond to those inherited from the Greek colonists
during the Archaic and Classic ages. This approach also
highlighted a particular process that is still in use in these
pottery workshops and was handed down for centuries, from
one generation to another as follows: the use of brackish water
to work the clay up to the plastic state, in order to guarantee a
high performance of CaO-rich clays, avoiding the flocculation
of the clay particles (Montana et al. 2015).
The analytical techniques
for the investigation of raw materials
The mineralogical and petrographic composition of ceramic
raw materials can be achieved using many analysis methods
Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175 Page 13 of 19 175

Fig. 10 Preparation of large clay

briquettes for experimental use
with the help of professional
potter operating with traditional
methods (Mr Giovanni
D’Angelo, Polizzi Generosa):
manual grinding of the clay by
metal rolling pin (a–b); mixing
the clay with water until a clay
paste with optimal workability is
obtained (c–d); manufacture of
briquettes (12 × 5 × 1 cm) through
a special wooden frame (e–g);
making cylindrical briquettes
using a manual extruder (h, i and
l); individual code marking of the
experimental clay briquettes (m);
air-drying (n)

(Hunt 2016 and references therein). Bulk chemistry has been
treated in detail in Hein and Kilikoglou (2020) in this Topical
Collection, as regards both the methodological and applicative
aspects. Similarly, the application of optical microscopy has
served as a leitmotif to this paper, and the type of information
it can provide has already been discussed at length.
A few aspects of X-ray powder diffraction, instead,
still need to be addressed. XRPD is a complex technique
that has long been used both in earth sciences (e.g.
Jenkins and Snyder 1996; Suryanarayana and Grant
2013) and archaeometry (Artioli and Angelini 2010), for
the qualitative and quantitative mineralogical analysis of a
large variety of natural and artificial materials. In the field
of clay characterization, the use of XRPD provides qual-
itative, semi-quantitative or quantitative phase analysis of
either the bulk sample or a specific granulometric frac-
tion. A detailed speciation (semi-quantitative or
quantitative) of the clay minerals can be accomplished,
after a treatment that allows the separation of the <
2-μm particles by settling, according to the Stokes’ Law
(see Gliozzo 2020b in this TC and the centrifugation
techniques described in the following paragraph). The
 175 Page 14 of 19
Fig. 11 (a) Inserting the dried
briquettes into the muffle furnace;
clay briquettes showing different
colours after controlled drying at
100 °C (b) and firing at 900 °C (c)
mineralogical composition of the clay fraction may not
represent a key discriminant for provenance investigation
but it is an important feature with which to evaluate the
behaviour of a specific raw material during firing.
Unfortunately, Neogene clay deposits in the
Mediterranean area may be characterized by a rather sim-
ilar ratio of clay minerals (kaolinite, illite, smectite, chlo-
rite), and therefore, only a clear difference in the ratio of
two or more clay minerals (e.g. illite and kaolinite) is
significant. Conversely, the mineralogical phases com-
prising the sandy fraction can be investigated without a
granulometric separation, although quantitatively less
represented.
Lastly, it is worth emphasizing that each technique requires
a specific preparation of the sample but all have a few prelim-
inary steps in common as follows: drying, gentle grounding
(decohesion), homogenization and quartering.
The grain size analysis
The granules of any unconsolidated geological deposit are
divided into three principal categories (Wentworth 1922) as
follows: gravel (size > 2 mm), sand (0.06–2 mm) and mud;
this last is further divided into silt (0.06–0.004 mm) and clay
(< 0.004 mm). Grain size analysis is a conventional laboratory
analytical technique aimed at determining the size distribution
(abundance or frequency) of the particles. Several analytical
Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175
methodologies can be applied, according to instrumental
availability, costs and expected times. The choice of method
also depends on the range of particle size and the specific aim
of the analysis. Traditional procedures, typically used for
sandy and muddy geomaterials, include sieving and settling.
More recently, automatic methodologies have been developed
including laser diffraction and imaging techniques (e.g.
Syvitski 1991; BS ISO 13320 2010).
The method described here is based on settling procedures,
and it has been applied with satisfactory results to several case
studies aimed at ceramic raw materials sourcing (e.g. Gee and
Bauder 1986; Montana et al. 2011).First, each raw clay sam-
ple is manually divided into a few centimetre pieces, spread
out on absorbent paper on a laboratory bench and allowed to
air-dry for a period of at least 2 weeks (optimal conditions T =
20 °C and RH = 60%). In order to further dry it, the material is
placed in a thermo-ventilated oven for 48 h at a temperature of
60 °C. The following grinding (decohesion) has the purpose
of bringing the particles to the size of a few millimetres and it
is important to perform it in a careful and gentle way, in order
to preserve the most fragile aplastic inclusions (i.e. calcareous
bioclasts, limestone fragments, etc.). For this reason, it is ad-
visable to carry out this practice manually, using a porcelain
mortar and a wooden pestle. Grains greater than fine gravel
size or more (> 4 mm) and organic materials (i.e. organisms
remain, roots, seeds, etc.) are removed by sieving and about
1 kg of the material passing through the sieve with a 4-mm
Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175 Page 15 of 19 175

Fig. 12 Multiple plotting of

various diffractometric patterns
carried out on the same clayey
material after drying (100 °C) and
firing at various temperatures,
showing the disappearance of
kaolinite (Kln) starting from
600 °C, illite (Ill) and calcite (Cal)
from 800 to 900 °C, the gradual
increase of Ca-feldspar (Fdl) and
haematite (Hem) and the appear-
ance of gehlenite (Geh) and Ca-
pyroxene (Di) above 800 °C

opening (US Mesh 5) is repeatedly mixed (homogenized) and
quartered.3 A quarter of the homogenized material (approxi-
mately 250 g) is used for the complete set of analyses.
About25–50 g of the quartered material is allowed to dry
again in the oven at 60 °C for 48 h and then left to cool down
to room temperature in a desiccator with silica gel. After being
dried, each sample is (a) weighed with an analytical balance
3 to perform sedimentation analysis. The sample may also need
The quartering is obtained on the whole dried and well-crushed sample. This
sample is mixed repeatedly and dispersed on a sufficiently large shelf until it
assumes a roughly regular shape (i.e. circular, square, etc.). With the help of a
spatula, the sample is divided into four more or less equal parts. Only one part
is selected and the other three are stored and preserved. The same operation is
repeated several times, starting from the last separate aliquot, until the quantity
necessary for all the planned laboratory analyses is obtained.
(accuracy 0.1 mg), (b) placed in a beaker filled with deionized
water (500–1000 ml) and (c) dispersed using an ultrasonic
homogenizer. In some cases, depending on the composition
of the clay material, appropriate quantities of dispersing
agents become necessary to avoid flocculation, which hinders
any acceptable performance of the grain size separation rou-
tine. Calgon (a combination of sodium hexametaphosphate
and sodium carbonate) is a popular dispersing agent adopted
treatment with hydrogen peroxide (30%) in order to remove
the organic matter, which can hamper the dispersion of the
clay-sized particles in water.
After prolonged dispersion treatment (several hours), the
sandy fraction is separated using a settling procedure. The
 175 Page 16 of 19 Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175

Fig. 13 Thin section micrographs

(crossed nicol; scale bar =
0.5 mm): (a) Terravecchia
Formation clays sampled in the
surroundings of the Elymian city
of Entella, western Sicily (after
firing test); (b) brick produced in
the 1950s at Contessa Entellina
(Palermo) with traditional
methods; (c) archaeological ce-
ramic sample (table ware) from
Entella dated to the fifth century
BC (d) Marne di S. Cipirello
Formation clay taken from San
Giuseppe Iato (Palermo), north-
western Sicily (after firing test);
(e) tile produced with traditional
methods in S. Giuseppe Iato in the
1960s; (f) archaeological ceramic
sample (table ware) from the
Elymian site of Iato dating back
to the sixth century BC

suspension of dispersed material is removed by ultrasonic bath
and quickly poured into a graduated cylinder. After a short
time, calculated according to Stoke’s law, all the sand-sized
grains are deposited at the bottom of the cylinder and the
suspension of clay and silt particles is rapidly siphoned off
and stored in other beakers (Fig. 8a). The sandy fraction is
recovered from the bottom of the cylinder by repeated wash-
ing with deionized water and stored in a little glass container.
It is then observed under the binocular microscope with
reflected light, in order to ensure it is clean enough, or whether
minute lumps of undisaggregated fine particles are still pres-
ent. In this last case, a few further washings are needed to
thoroughly clean the sandy fraction that, at the end of
cleaning, is dried in an oven at 60 °C and weighed once
cooled. The procedure begins with the separation of the fine
fraction (silt and clay), kept, until this moment, dispersed in
water through ultrasonic treatment. This suspension is intro-
duced into appropriate conical centrifuge tubes and positioned
in a certified centrifuge machine (Fig. 8b). Following a cycle
at 2500 rpm, the silt particles settle in the bottom of the cen-
trifuge cone, and the clay particles remain in suspension. The
silt particles are removed from the tube dried in the oven
(60 °C for 48 h) and weighed. The suspension of the clay
particles, instead, is collected in a beaker and its weight % is
derived by subtracting the weights of both sand and silt frac-
tions from the (initial) total dry weight. Finally, the clay sus-
pension is centrifuged at 4000 rpm for 10 min. The settled clay
particles can be dispersed again in an adequate amount of
deionized water and, after pipetting a small amount on a slide,
the suspension is air-dried. In this way, an oriented sample is
ready for XRPD analysis.
Experimental firing of “ceramic clays”
A large proportion of the quartered raw clay can be used for
the experimental firings, under controlled conditions.
The number of tests (or “briquettes”) generally obtained
from each clay sample varies from a minimum of two to an
optimal condition of at least eight, including one to be left
dried at room temperature. The preparation of the briquettes
can be easily completed in the laboratory with a basic equip-
ment. Deionized water is gradually added to the clay until a
Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175
plastic mixture is obtained. Then, with the aid of a steel spat-
ula, the paste is pressed in the moulds4 (Fig. 9). Although in
some cases, it can also be modelled according to a desired
shape. For example, cylindrical and flat parallelepiped speci-
mens were developed as part of an experimental study into the
alteration processes that archaeological ceramics can undergo
in contact with seawater (Montana et al. 2014; Fig. 10).
After shaping the test, the mould is placed in a thermo-
ventilated oven at 60 °C, for 48 h or left to dry at room tem-
perature. Once it is completely dry, a series of planned firing
ramps can be carried out in a muffle furnace (Fig. 11). Typical
ramps imply a heating rate of 100 °C/h. The tests are kept at
the maximum temperature for 2–3 h and then cooled down to
room temperature at a controlled rate of 100 °C/1 h.
In this way, each test is representative of the maximum
temperature reached during firing and, consequently, multiple
firings are required, unless opening the chamber to gradually
extract some briquettes while the process is running. The
number of cycles to be performed is a function of the research
objectives, and ranges from temperatures as low as 550 °C
(i.e. below the destabilization temperature of microcrystalline
calcite) to temperatures as high as 1050/1100 °C (i.e. below
the melting of the paste). For a detailed mineralogical study
aimed at defining the maximum firing temperature or other
technical parameters, such as linear shrinkage and/or colour
transformation, the suggested firing temperatures are as fol-
lows: 200, 400, 600, 800, 900, 1000 and 1100 °C. In any case,
whatever the ramp used, each briquette should be investigated
by XRPD, optical microscopy and SEM-EDS.
The comparison of firing tests and archaeological ceramics
can be performed by both XRPD and polarizing microscopy.
The XRPD pattern of a test allows the transformations of the
bulk mineralogical composition to be experimentally verified.
The associations of phases that are stable at a given tempera-
ture can be used as geothermometers and, when the same
associations are found in an archaeological ceramic produced
with the same clay, the maximum firing temperature can be
inferred by comparison (Fig. 12).
A comparison between tests and archaeological finds at the
polarizing microscope can be decisive for provenance issues.
The nature and the relative abundance of monomineralic gran-
ules and/or rock fragments in the sandy fraction can be com-
pared and the association of a clay deposit with a ceramic
workshop may be demonstrated (Fig. 13).
Conclusive remarks
The study of clay deposits is of utmost importance in
archaeometry because it allows the supply basins for raw
4 “sources” of pottery: an ethnoarchaeological approach. Am
Wood is preferable as it more effectively absorbs the moisture expelled from
the clay paste.
Page 17 of 19 175
materials to be identified and associated with ceramic produc-
tion. The study of a ceramic production should thus always be
combined with the study of local raw materials.
From a methodological standpoint, the potential offered by
the minero-petrographic study has been discussed and the ad-
vantages of using the polarizing microscope have been
highlighted. This last technique, in fact, allows the MPGs to
be accurately defined and these, in turn, provide the compar-
ative ground for provenance investigation. The MPGs have
thus been described in detail and the importance of relying on
a standardized procedure has been further stressed.
The contribution offered by ethnoarchaeometry has been
considered, as well as the crucial importance of experimental
firing, especially for technological reconstructions.
Lastly, a method to plan field survey for clay sampling has
been proposed and the range of clay treatments and investiga-
tions has been examined, from grain size analysis to the ap-
plication of several analytical techniques, and suitable
methods to compare raw materials, firing tests and ceramic
products have been discussed.
In conclusion, it should be noted that minero-petrographic
investigation is not an alternative to chemical study; rather, it
is absolutely complementary and functional to a clearer inter-
pretation of the elemental composition data.
Availability of data and material Data sharing is not applicable
to this review article as no new data were created or analysed
in this study.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest The author has no conflicts of interest to declare.
References
Adan-Bayewitz D, Perlman I (1985) Local pottery provenience studies: a
role for clay analysis. Archaeometry 27-2(1985):203–217
Aloupi-Siotis E (2020) Ceramic technology. How to characterise black
Fe-based glass-ceramic coatings. Archaeological and
Anthropological Sciences [this topical collection]. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s12520-020-01134-x
Andrade FA, Al-Qureshi HA, Hotza D (2011) Measuring the plasticity of
clays: a review. Applied Clay Science 51:1–7
Angourakis A, Martinez Ferreras V, Torrano A, GurtEsparraguera JM
(2018) Presenting multivariate statistical protocols in R using wine
amphoarae productions in Catalonia, Spain. J Archaeol Sci 93:150–
165
Arnold DE (1972) Mineralogical analyses of ceramic materials Quinua,
Department of Ayacucho, Peru. Archaeometry 14:93–102
Arnold PJ (2000) Working without a net: recent trends in ceramic
ethnoarchaeology. J Archaeol Res 8(2):105–133
Arnold DE, Neff H, Bishop RL (1991) Compositional analysis and
Anthropol 93:70–90
 175 Page 18 of 19
Artioli G, Angelini I (2010) Scientific methods and cultural heritage: an
introduction to the application of materials science to archaeometry
and conservation science. Oxford University Press, Oxford , p 536
Baxter MJ (2009) Archaeological data analysis and fuzzy clustering.
Archaeometry 51(6):879–1054
Baxter MJ, Beardah CC, Papageorgiou I, Cau MA, Day PM, Kilikoglou V
(2008) On statistical approaches to the study of ceramic artefacts using
geochemical and petrographic data. Archaeometry 50(1):142–157
Bechtold B, Montana G, Randazzo L (2018) Campanian wine for Punic
Sicily: petrographic and archaeological studies of graeco-italic am-
phorae from Palermo. Mediter Archaeol Archaeom 18:11–33
Bishop RL, Rands RL, Holley G (1982) Ceramic compositional analysis in
archaeological perspective. In: Schiffer MB (ed) Advances in archae-
ological method and theory, Vol. 5, 1982. Academic Press, New York
Blair TC, McPherson JG (1999) Grain-size and textural classification of
coarse sedimentary particles. J Sedimentary Res 69(1):6–19
Bowser BJ (2000) From pottery to politics: an ethnoarchaeological study
of political factionalism, ethnicity, and domestic pottery style in the
Ecuadorian Amazon. J Archaeol Method Theory 7(3):219–248
BS ISO 13320:2009 (2010). Particle size analysis. Laser diffraction
methods
Buxeda I Garrigos J, CauOntiveros MA, Kilikoglou V (2003) Chemical
variability in clays and pottery from a traditional cooking pot pro-
duction village: testing assumptions in Pereruela. Archaeometry
45(3):1–17
Cantin N, Mayor A (2018) Ethno-archaeometry in eastern Senegal: the
connections between raw materials and finished ceramic products. J
Archaeol Sci Rep 21:1181–1190
Cau Ontiveros MA, Day PM, Montana G (2002) Secondary calcite in
archaeological ceramics: evaluation of alteration and contamination
processes by thin section study. In “Modern trends in scientific studies
on ancient ceramics”. Kilikoglou V., Hein A., Maniatis Y., (Eds),
British Archaeological Reports (BAR). International Series 1011:9–18
Cau Ontiveros MA, Day PM, Baxter MJ, Papageorgiou I, Iliopoulos I,
Montana G (2004) Exploring automatic grouping procedures in ce-
ramic petrology. J Archaeol Sci 31:1325–1338
Cau Ontiveros MA, Montana G, Tsantini E, Randazzo L (2015) Ceramic
ethnoarchaeometry in western Sardinia: production of cooking ware
at Pabillonis. Archaeometry 57(3):453–475
Costin CL (2000) The use of ethnoarchaeology for the archaeological
study of ceramic production. Journal of Archaeological Methods
and Theory 7(4):377–403
Day PM (1989) Technology and ethnography in petrographic studies of
ceramics. In: Maniatis Y (ed) Archaeometry. Elsevier, Amsterdam,
pp 139–147
de Lapérouse J-F (2020) Ceramic musealisation: how ceramics are con-
served and the implications for research. Archaeological and
Anthropological Sciences [this topical collection]. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s12520-020-01139-6
Delly JG (2017) Essentials of polarized light microscopy and ancillary
techniques. The McCrone group, Inc. (US), p. 620
Eramo G (2020) Ceramic technology. How to recognize clay processing.
Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences [this topical collec-
tion]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-020-01132-z
Felts WM (1942) A petrographic examination of potsherds from ancient
Troy. Am J Archaeol 46:237–244
Freestone IC (1995) Ceramic petrography. Am J Archaeol 99:111–115
Freestone IC, Johns C, Potter T (1982) Current research in ceramics: thin
section studies. In: British museum occasional paper, vol 32. UK,
London
Fulford M.G., Peacock D.P.S. (1984). Excavations at Carthage: the
British Mission. I, 2, Sheffield, UK
Galli A, Sibilia E, Martini M (2020) Ceramic chronology by lumines-
cence dating. How and when it is possible to date ceramic artefacts.
Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences [this topical collec-
tion]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-020-01140-z
Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175
Gee, G.W., Bauder J.W., 1986. Particle-size analysis. In A. Klute (Ed.)
Methods of soil analysis. Part 1. 2nd ed. Agron. Monogr. 9. ASA
and SSSA, Madison, pp 383–411
Gliozzo E (2020a) Ceramics investigation. Research questions and sam-
pling criteria. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences [this
topical collection]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-020-01128-9
Gliozzo E (2020b) Ceramic technology. How to reconstruct the firing
process. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences [this topical
collection]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-020-01133-y
Gliozzo E, Iacoviello F, Foresi L M (2014) Geosources for ceramic pro-
duction: the clays from the Neogene-Quaternary Albegna Basin
(southern Tuscany). Appl Clay Sci 91-92:105–116
Gliozzo E, Turchiano M, Fantozzi P L, Romano A V (2018) Geosources
for ceramic production and communication pathways: The ex-
change network and the scale of chemical representative differences.
Appl Clay 161:242–255
Gualtieri S (2020) Ceramic raw materials. How to establish the techno-
logical suitability of a raw material. Archaeological and
Anthropological Sciences [this topical collection]. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s12520-020-01135-w
Harrad L (2004) Gabbroic clay sources in Cornwall: a petrographic study
of prehistoric pottery and clay samples. Oxf J Archaeol 23:271–286
Hein A, Kilikoglou V (2017) Compositional variability of archaeological
ceramics in the eastern Mediterranean and implications for the de-
sign of provenance studies. J Archaeol Sci Rep 16:564–572
Hein A, Kilikoglou V (2020) Ceramic raw materials. How to recognize
them and locate the supply basins Chemistry. Archaeological and
Anthropological Sciences [this topical collection]. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s12520-020-01135-w
Henderson J, Ma H, Cui J, Ma R, Xiao H (2020) Isotopic investigations of
Chinese ceramics. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences [this
topical collection]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-020-01138-7
Hughes MJ (1981) Scientific Studies in Ancient Ceramics. In: British
Museum Occasional Paper, p 19
Hunt AMW (2016) The Oxford handbook of archaeological ceramic
analysis. Oxford University Press, Oxford (UK), p 600
Ionescu C, Hoeck V (2020) Ceramic technology. How to investigate
surface finishing Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences [this
topical collection]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-020-01144-9
Jenkins R, Snyder R (1996) Introduction to X-ray powder diffractometry.
John Wiley & Sons, New York, p 432
Kerr P (1977) Optical mineralogy, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York, p
492
Kolb C C (2001) Comments on ‘Technological choices in ceramic pro-
duction’. Archaeometry 43:273–277
Kramer C (1985) Ceramic ethnoarchaeology. Annu Rev Anthropol 14:
77–102
Longacre W (1991) Ceramic ethnoarchaeology. University of Arizona
Press, Tucson
MacKenzie WS, Adams AE, Brodie KH (2017) Rocks and minerals in
thin section: A colour atlas, 2nd edn. CRC Press (Taylor & Francis
Group), London, p 242
Maggetti M (1982) Phase analysis and its significance for technology and
origin. In: Olin JS, Franklin AD (eds) Archeological Ceramics.
Smithsonian Institution Press, pp 121–133
Maritan L (2020) Ceramic abandonment. How to recognise post-
depositional transformations. Archaeological and Anthropological
Sciences [this topical collection]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-
020-01141-y
Maritan L, Mazzoli C, Freestone I (2007) Modelling changes in mollusk
shell internal micro-structure during firing: implications for temper-
ature estimate in shell-bearing pottery. Archaeometry 49(3):529–
541
Matthew AJ (1991) Spots before the eyes: new comparison charts for
visual percentage estimation in archaeological material. In:
Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2020) 12:175
Middleton A, Freestone I (eds) Recent developments in ceramic
petrology. British Museum Occasional Paper, vol 81, pp 399–409
McCrone WC, McCrone LB, Delly JG (1978) Polarized light microsco-
py. Ann Arbor Science Publishers, p 251
Middleton A, Freestone I (1991) Recent Developments in Ceramic
Petrology. In: BritishMuseumOccasionalPaper, 81, London, pp
369–388
Middleton AP, Freestone IC, Leese MN (1985) Textural analysis of ce-
ramic in thin section: evaluation of grain sampling procedures.
Archaeometry 27:64–74
Montana G, Fabbri B, Santoro S, Gualtieri S, Iliopoulos I, Guiducci G,
Mini S (2007) Pantellerian ware: A comprehensive archaeometric
review. Archaeometry 49(3):455–481
Montana G, Polito AM, Iliopoulos I (2009) Indigenous tableware pro-
duction during the archaic period in Western Sicily: new results
from petrographic analysis. In: Quinn PS (ed) Interpreting silent
artefacts, Petrographic Approaches to Archaeological Ceramics.
Archaeopress, Oxford (UK), pp 47–63
Montana G, Cau MA, Polito AM, Azzaro EM (2011) Characterisation of
clayey raw materials for ceramic manufacture in ancient Sicily. Appl
Clay Sci 53:476–488
Montana G, Heinze CE, Polito AM, Randazzo L (2012) Archaeometric
evidence attesting production of indigenous archaic pottery at Monte
Polizzo (Western Sicily). Periodico di Mineralogia 81:107–130
Montana G, Polito AM, Tsantini E (2015) Ceramic ethnoarchaeometry in
Sicily: recent traditional production as a tool for understanding past
manufactures. In: Militello PM, Oniz H (eds) Proceedings of the 15th
symposium on Mediterranean archaeology, Catania, 3-5 march
2011, BAR International Series 2695 (I), Oxford, pp 253–258
Montana G, Randazzo L, Belfiore C M, La Russa M F, Ruffolo S A, De
Francesco A M, Pezzino A, Punturo R, Di Stefano V (2014) An
original experimental approach to study the alteration and/or con-
tamination of archaeological ceramics originated by seawater burial.
Period di Mineral 83(1):89–120
Olivera Modesto C, Bernardin AM (2008) Determination of clay plastic-
ity: indentation method versus Pfefferkorn method. Appl Clay Sci
40:15–19
Papageorgiou, I. (2020). Ceramic investigation. How to perform statisti-
cal analyses.Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences [this top-
ical collection]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-020-01142-x
Peacock DPS (1971) Petrography of certain coarse pottery. In Cuncliffe
B., (Ed.) excavation at Fishbourne, 1961-1969. Research Report of
the Society of Antiquaries 27:255–259
Perkins, D., Henke, K.R. (2003). Minerals in thin section. Pearson edu-
cation (US), p. 176
Pichler H, Schmitt-Riegraf C (1997) Rock forming minerals in thin sec-
tion. Chapman & Hall, London, p 217
Pradell T, Molera J (2020) Ceramic technology. How to characterise
ceramic glazes. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences [this
topical collection]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-020-01136-9
Quinn PS (2013) Ceramic petrography: the interpretation of archaeolog-
ical pottery and related artefacts in thin section. Archaeopress,
Oxford, p 260
Quinn PS, Day PM (2007) Ceramic micropaleontology: the analysis of
microfossils in ancient ceramics. J Micropaleontol 26(2):159–168
Raymond LA (2010) Petrography: Handspecimen and thin section pe-
trography. Waveland Press Inc., Illinois, p 170
Reedy CL (2008) Thin-section petrography of stone and ceramic cultural
materials. Archetype books, (UK), p 260
Rice PM (1987) Pottery analysis: a sourcebook. University of Chicago
Press, Chicago
Rice PM (1996) Recent ceramic analysis: 2. Composition, production,
and theory. Journal of Archaeological Research 4/3(1996):165–202
Robinson PC, Bradbury S (1992) Qualitative polarized-light microscopy.
Taylor & Francis Ltd, p 174
Page 19 of 19 175
Schmitz RM, Schroeder C, Charlier R (2004) Chemo-mechanical inter-
actions in clay: a correlation between clay mineralogy and Atterberg
limits. Appl Clay Sci 26(1–4):351–358
Schubert P (1986) Petrographic modal analysis: a necessary complement
to chemical analysis of ceramic. Archaeometry 28-2(1986):163–178
Sciau P, Sanchez C, Gliozzo E (2020) Ceramic technology. How to charac-
terise terra sigillata ware. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences
[this topical collection]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-020-01137-8
Shepard AO (1936) The Technology of Pecos Pottery. In: Kidder A,
Shepard AO (eds) The glaze-paint. Yale University Press, New
Haven, Culinary and Other Wares. The Pottery of Pecos Volume
II, pp 389–588
Shepard AO (1956) Ceramics for the archaeologist. In: Carnegie
Institution Publications 609. DC, Washington
Shepard AO (1965) Rio Grande glaze-paint pottery: A test of petrograph-
ic analysis. In: Matson FR (ed) Ceramics and man. Wenner-Gren
Foundation for Anthropological Research, Chicago, pp 62–87
Sillar, Tite MS (2000) The challenge of ‘technological choices’ for mate-
rials science approaches in archaeology. Archaeometry 42(1):2–20
Stark MT (2003) Current issues in ceramic Ethnoarchaeology. J Archaeol
Res 11(3):193–242
Suryanarayana C, Grant NM (2013) X-ray diffraction: a practical ap-
proach. Springer Science & Business Media, p 27
Syvitski JPM (1991) Principles. Methods and Application of Particle Size
Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (UK), p 368
Thér R (2020) Ceramic technology. How to reconstruct and describe pottery-
forming practices. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences [this
topical collection]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-020-01131-0
Thierrin-Michael G, Galetti G (1996) Amphores vinaires italiques: deux
problèmes rencontrées lors de l'utilisation de groupes de références
pour l'attribution de tessons d'origine inconnue. Actes du Colloque de
Périgueux 1995, Supplément à la Revue d'Archéométrie pp 119–124
Tite MS (2008) Ceramic production, provenance and use: a review.
Archaeometry 50, 2(2008):216–231
Van der Plas L, Tobi AC (1965) A chart for judging the reliability of point
counting results. Am J Sci 263(1):87–90
Velde B (1995) Composition and mineralogy of clay minerals. In: Velde
B (ed) Origin and mineralogy of clays. Springer-Verlag, New York,
pp 8–42
Wentworth CK (1922) A scale of grade and class terms of clastic sedi-
ments. J Geol 30(5):377–392
Whitbread IK (1989) A proposal for the systematic description of thin
sections towards the study of ancient ceramic technology. In:
Maniatis Y (ed) Archaeometry, proceedings of the 25th international
symposium. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, pp 127–138
Whitbread IK (1991) Image and data processing in ceramic petrology. In:
Middleton A, Freestone I (eds) Recent Developments in Ceramic
Petrology. British Museum Occasional Paper 81, London, 1991, pp
369–388
Whitbread IK (1995) Greek transport amphorae: a petrological and ar-
chaeological study. In: Fitch Laboratory Occasional Paper, 4. British
School at Athens
Williams DF (1983) Petrology of ceramics. In: Kempe RC, Harvey AP
(eds) D. The Petrology of Archaeological Artefacts, London, pp
301–329
Williams, H., Turner, F., Gilbert, C. (1982). Petrography: an introduction
to the study of rocks in thin section (2nd edition). W. H. Freeman &
co (Macmillan publishers), p. 626
Worley N (2009) Henry Clifton Sorby (11826-1908) and the develop-
ment of thin section petrography in Sheffield. In: Quinn PS (ed)
Interpreting silent artefacts, Petrographic Approaches to
Archaeological Ceramics. Archaeopress, Oxford, pp 1–9
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.